I think we get some calls when we play at the our house. I've watched a few Duke games in my days and they get all the calls. There has been a few were I had to stop watching because it's so one sided. I wouldn't want to be a ref anywhere anytime.DH

That is pure baloney. Did it ever cross your mind that a team that has won 31 games against 5 losses is going to get fouled a lot towards the end of games because that's what losing teams do in an attempt to stop the clock and put the winning team on the line? Duke lost 1 game t home this year, so I would imagine that this was happening a lot. If you ask me, only 73 less fouls than their opponents seems kinda low for such a dominant team.

Of course home teams always get the calls (are you trying to make the case that KU doesn't in AFH???), but did it ever cross your mind that they are a very disciplined team that rarely is in foul trouble? Did it cross your mind to see how many less fouls KU had in AFH this year tha their opponents? Of course you didn't, because you just read that little stat somewhere and then paste it on here as if you did the research. Without Gravey, how many KU players fouled out this year? Probably more than 2, yeah, but not a whole lot.

Well then, you need to learn the fine art of making valid inferences. Think about your data and then try to make some logical conclusions.

You are right, I am sorry. You didn't read the stat anywhere, because if you had surely the person reporting it would have offered plausible reasons why they had 73 less fouls than their opponents, not just the silly Duke-had-less-fouls-than-their-opponents-so-the-refs-all-love-Duke.

i agree...why are we even talking about duke on a kansas message board? we didn't play them this year, didn't lose and recruits to them, didn't really do anything with them at all for the last couple of years. so why are we talking about them in this context? get over the duke hype, it's people like this poster that makes them so annoying. if people would just stop making a big deal about them then it wouldn't be a big deal! pretty simple.

But do you understand that validity has to do with the inferences certain facts permit? The facts that you posted are not controversial. Your silly conclusion is what's at issue, or at least that's what I was interested in.

Richardhead,You are a little too strident here, I think. Your suggested conclusion (lots of fouls on Duke because they win a lot) is also conjecture. If you presented data showing that they win a lot of CLOSE games at home, and that they shoot many more non-shooting foul free throws (i.e., one and one) than other teams (meaning that they are fouled when the object of the foul is to induce a change in possession of the ball) in which case lots of fouls might be a tactic the opposing and losing team would use, then your idea might be a good one. As it stands, your lack of corroborating data makes your conclusion no more sound than the other one offered, but you present yours with a great deal more grating and gnashing.